No it wasn't. If I understand 'the model' correctly, the reasoning would be: Hamilton and Alonso are equally fast, Alonso was way faster than Massa, but Bottas was only slightly faster than Massa. Therefore according to 'the model' Bottas should be much further off Hamilton's pace than he actually is.Of course, these comparisons are made over a period of ten years, with different teams and cars, etcetera. Which is why I don't believe in 'the model'.

With regards to qualifying, the model had Alonso 0.3 on average ahead of Massa. It also had Bottas 0.2 ahead of Massa. Therefore it would have Alonso about 0.1 ahead of Bottas. All very simplified because Bottas is massively up and down but he is in the ball park with season averages. He is on average 0.1 behind Hamilton.

Hamilton was never able to properly dominate Rosberg in qualifying when they were teammates. Overall Rosberg took 29 pole positions to Hamilton's 35. Which is not exactly convincing. I believe that the average gap across 4 seasons and 78 races was 0.091s in Hamilton's favor.

Whilst I agree, the numbers do learn toward Nico a bit through luck factors. Nothing huge but a small portion.

For example, Nico competed in every Q3 over that period. Hamilton broke down or took engine penalties-

Then you have Monaco 2014 and the block and Hungary 2016 when Nico was slower than Ricciardo and Hamilton but didn't lift much for the yellows when everybody else aborted. Risky and smart in equal measure - but he was nowhere near the quickest driver that day. That is 7 of Nico's poles kind of unopposed. I don't think Hamilton took a single lucky pole against Nico.

29-35 flatters him a bit, no doubt Hamilton would have had a few more and Nico a few less if Hamilton didn't break down so much in qualifying.

The grandrix rankings site which quotes 10-9 gives Seb Bahrain were Dan was faster but took a penalty and AD where Dan was faster but they both took penalties. It also gives Dan USA where Seb took a penalty.

So it's at least 11-7 with no result in USA.

There may well be others I've missed which effects the score though I admit, but those are the ones I recall.

Yeah I was wondering were 10-9 came from, on my system I had it 9-4 to Ricciardo but I also discount wet qualifying, I will give it that Vettel was better than Ricciardo in the wet but then again so was both Vergne and now Verstappen.

Yeah I think the party started early for Hamilton, also Hamilton was actually still faster than Rosberg in most of the races he just couldn't get close enough to pass.

That's not quite true...

After the Japanese Grand Prix - which Lewis won by a dominant margin - the only race you could make a good case for him being the faster driver but unable to pass was Mexico. In Russia Nico qualified on pole and was cruising to victory when his car failed. In the United States Nico was comfortably ahead before his 'gust of wind' - it was completely his fault, but it wasn't that Lewis was right behind and trying to overtake before it, either. And in Brazil and Abu Dhabi Nico was comfortably on pole and never really challenged in the race; Lewis finished about 8 seconds behind in both, which doesn't fit with being faster but not close enough to pass.

I would have to look, I must admit I don't remember all the races, in the USA Rosberg made the mistake because Hamilton was catching him hand over fist.

Mexio and AD, Nico had Lewis covered but Hamilton said in Brazil he could have gone a lot quicker during that race.

Well I remember Mexico were Hamilton was all over Rosberg like a rash but the turbulence took care of any possible passing attempt, so I add Brazil and the USA and that makes 3.

Bottas was much faster than Massa I believe, at least from summer 2015 onwards.

You're contradicting your own argument here. According to 'the model' the gap should have been identical throughout their three seasons together.

You average it out, the more years the better.

I get that, but it's still a weakness of this type of thinking that you're comparing data that isn't fully comparable. Massa and Alonso were teammates for four years, Massa and Bottas for three, but Alonso and Hamilton for only one. Based on that single season, ten years ago, that also was Hamilton's first season, people assume that they are still equally fast. Possible, of course, but I think it unlikely.

Bottas was much faster than Massa I believe, at least from summer 2015 onwards.

You're contradicting your own argument here. According to 'the model' the gap should have been identical throughout their three seasons together.

You average it out, the more years the better.

I get that, but it's still a weakness of this type of thinking that you're comparing data that isn't fully comparable. Massa and Alonso were teammates for four years, Massa and Bottas for three, but Alonso and Hamilton for only one. Based on that single season, ten years ago, that also was Hamilton's first season, people assume that they are still equally fast. Possible, of course, but I think it unlikely.

I agree that the 1 year sample is far from ideal, but the multiple year models between Kimi/Massa, Alonso/Massa, Vettel/Kimi and Bottas/Massa when you cross reference them they're just about spot on to what you would expect.

Hamilton was never able to properly dominate Rosberg in qualifying when they were teammates. Overall Rosberg took 29 pole positions to Hamilton's 35. Which is not exactly convincing. I believe that the average gap across 4 seasons and 78 races was 0.091s in Hamilton's favor.

Whilst I agree, the numbers do learn toward Nico a bit through luck factors. Nothing huge but a small portion.

For example, Nico competed in every Q3 over that period. Hamilton broke down or took engine penalties-

Then you have Monaco 2014 and the block and Hungary 2016 when Nico was slower than Ricciardo and Hamilton but didn't lift much for the yellows when everybody else aborted. Risky and smart in equal measure - but he was nowhere near the quickest driver that day. That is 7 of Nico's poles kind of unopposed. I don't think Hamilton took a single lucky pole against Nico.

29-35 flatters him a bit, no doubt Hamilton would have had a few more and Nico a few less if Hamilton didn't break down so much in qualifying.

The only 'lucky' pole for Lewis I can think of, or would qualify for this I mean, is Italy 2016(Or was it 2015) where he had the only upgraded Mercedes engine because Nico's went south in FP and be had to use an old one for qualifying without the update. (I think it then went bang in the race as well).

I'm pretty sure that's the one Lewis topped every session,led every lap etc.. and got the granddaddy mega big Kahuna burger chelem or whatever they call it these days.

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

The grandrix rankings site which quotes 10-9 gives Seb Bahrain were Dan was faster but took a penalty and AD where Dan was faster but they both took penalties. It also gives Dan USA where Seb took a penalty.

So it's at least 11-7 with no result in USA.

There may well be others I've missed which effects the score though I admit, but those are the ones I recall.

Yeah I was wondering were 10-9 came from, on my system I had it 9-4 to Ricciardo but I also discount wet qualifying, I will give it that Vettel was better than Ricciardo in the wet but then again so was both Vergne and now Verstappen.

Yeah a few people discount wet ones and I can see why as it can effect the averages quite a bit.

I quite like that grandprixrankings site but my big problem with it is they award qualifying no matter what happens, the guy can never leave his garage because of problems but it will still go down as a loss rather than a DNS like they do for the races.

A bloody asterisk would do!.

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

The grandrix rankings site which quotes 10-9 gives Seb Bahrain were Dan was faster but took a penalty and AD where Dan was faster but they both took penalties. It also gives Dan USA where Seb took a penalty.

So it's at least 11-7 with no result in USA.

There may well be others I've missed which effects the score though I admit, but those are the ones I recall.

Yeah I was wondering were 10-9 came from, on my system I had it 9-4 to Ricciardo but I also discount wet qualifying, I will give it that Vettel was better than Ricciardo in the wet but then again so was both Vergne and now Verstappen.

Yeah a few people discount wet ones and I can see why as it can effect the averages quite a bit.

I quite like that grandprixrankings site but my big problem with it is they award qualifying no matter what happens, the guy can never leave his garage because of problems but it will still go down as a loss rather than a DNS like they do for the races.

I've had that one, but only in a computer game for my Master System 2.

Those were the days.

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Bottas was much faster than Massa I believe, at least from summer 2015 onwards.

You're contradicting your own argument here. According to 'the model' the gap should have been identical throughout their three seasons together.

You average it out, the more years the better.

Yeah, well that doesn't work does it. Massa has clearly not been consistent over his career so how does that work?

How is it clear that Massa hasn't been consistent?

I think he has been consistent, similar gap to Alonso in each year x4, similar gap to Kimi in 3 years, similar gap to Bottas in his 3 years. There aren't really any outliers. 2008 is his best relative performance but that was a Raikkonen underperformance where he was unable to get heat into the tyres for qualifying which completely destroyed his year.

Bottas was much faster than Massa I believe, at least from summer 2015 onwards.

You're contradicting your own argument here. According to 'the model' the gap should have been identical throughout their three seasons together.

You average it out, the more years the better.

Yeah, well that doesn't work does it. Massa has clearly not been consistent over his career so how does that work?

How is it clear that Massa hasn't been consistent?

I think he has been consistent, similar gap to Alonso in each year x4, similar gap to Kimi in 3 years, similar gap to Bottas in his 3 years. There aren't really any outliers. 2008 is his best relative performance but that was a Raikkonen underperformance where he was unable to get heat into the tyres for qualifying which completely destroyed his year.

Watching him?.

Averaged out over a period it's a consistent result but within those years there was substantial swings in performance from him is what he means I think.

Look at first half of 2012 vs 2nd half and 2013 first half or vs Bottas he was marginally quicker in 2014 and that carried on until summer 2015 but then got completely destroyed by Bottas from then on which turned the average on its head.

Same with Kimi vs Seb. Destroyed 2015, won 2016, getting destroyed 2017. But it might average out as we expect but the actual performance swings wildly.

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Averaged out over a period it's a consistent result but within those years there was substantial swings in performance from him is what he means I think.

Look at first half of 2012 vs 2nd half and 2013 first half or vs Bottas he was marginally quicker in 2014 and that carried on until summer 2015 but then got completely destroyed by Bottas from then on which turned the average on its head.

Same with Kimi vs Seb. Destroyed 2015, won 2016, getting destroyed 2017. But it might average out as we expect but the actual performance swings wildly.

Kimi vs Seb is the oddest pairing in terms of performance fluctuation. Its the one modern example of a driver joining a team against an established driver and then doing worse in his 2nd year of that paring. Generally a driver new to team will have a slight increase in performance in the 2nd year (Bottas 2015, Button 2011, Alonso 2011, Hamilton 2014, Verstappen 2017 ...) but Vettel is the exception to that rule as was Kimi in 2008.

I think Kimi is so inconsistent that he throws a few things out, namely Massa for 2008 and Vettel in 2015. Kimi this year seems somewhere between 2015 and 2016, although he was in 2015 mode for the first 4-5 races.

A lot of Massa fluctuation coincided with how good those Ferrari's were and whilst there will always be a little variation he was always generally around 0.2-0.4 off Alonso the majority of the time.

Averaged out over a period it's a consistent result but within those years there was substantial swings in performance from him is what he means I think.

Look at first half of 2012 vs 2nd half and 2013 first half or vs Bottas he was marginally quicker in 2014 and that carried on until summer 2015 but then got completely destroyed by Bottas from then on which turned the average on its head.

Same with Kimi vs Seb. Destroyed 2015, won 2016, getting destroyed 2017. But it might average out as we expect but the actual performance swings wildly.

Kimi vs Seb is the oddest pairing in terms of performance fluctuation. Its the one modern example of a driver joining a team against an established driver and then doing worse in his 2nd year of that paring. Generally a driver new to team will have a slight increase in performance in the 2nd year (Bottas 2015, Button 2011, Alonso 2011, Hamilton 2014, Verstappen 2017 ...) but Vettel is the exception to that rule as was Kimi in 2008.

I think Kimi is so inconsistent that he throws a few things out, namely Massa for 2008 and Vettel in 2015. Kimi this year seems somewhere between 2015 and 2016, although he was in 2015 mode for the first 4-5 races.

A lot of Massa fluctuation coincided with how good those Ferrari's were and whilst there will always be a little variation he was always generally around 0.2-0.4 off Alonso the majority of the time.

Agree with all that. I think with Massa specifically it was the rear of the car, whenever it went he invariably went with it(1st half 2012,mid 2013,2nd half 2015).

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

I don't think anyone doubts that drivers do go through patches of form during a season but it's unusual for a driver to beat someone over a whole season if that driver has been better through their careers. I mean actually perform better than rather than just outscore.

I actually think Massa has been remarkably consistent through out his career. Bottas was obviously only in his second season in 2014 so no doubt improved slightly but other than that...

Mexio and AD, Nico had Lewis covered but Hamilton said in Brazil he could have gone a lot quicker during that race.

Well I remember Mexico were Hamilton was all over Rosberg like a rash but the turbulence took care of any possible passing attempt, so I add Brazil and the USA and that makes 3.

Anybody can say he could have gone quicker. If you give Brazil to Hamilton just because he said that, you might as well just give him 100% of the races. Hamilton had/has an established pattern of not beating his teammate in Brazil, and I take his statement with a sizable grain of salt.

Mexio and AD, Nico had Lewis covered but Hamilton said in Brazil he could have gone a lot quicker during that race.

Well I remember Mexico were Hamilton was all over Rosberg like a rash but the turbulence took care of any possible passing attempt, so I add Brazil and the USA and that makes 3.

Anybody can say he could have gone quicker. If you give Brazil to Hamilton just because he said that, you might as well just give him 100% of the races. Hamilton had/has an established pattern of not beating his teammate in Brazil, and I take his statement with a sizable grain of salt.

I'm not giving it to him just saying what he said. He also dropped back and caught him at will and was asking on the radio all race for some kind of alternate strategy because he was so much quicker. He also had a period of really going for it, running within 0.5 for multiple laps with DRS but just couldn't do a thing. Note when Hamilton lead races, Nico never got within DRS, he built a 3-4 second lead and coasted.

I don't entirely agree with that History in relation to Nico. Brazil 2014, Hamilton was so much quicker than Rosberg that he was about to over cut him on a track that favoured the undercut. But then he stayed out 1 lap to long and spun, falling back 9 seconds, which he closed in about 15 laps. The race pace difference that day was one of the largest in all of 2014.

Hamilton's race pace was always strong against Nico in Brazil.

There were races in 2015 when Nico had Hamilton covered; Austria, USA and possibly a couple of others. Brazil wasn't one of them. If Hamilton and Nico drove for different teams for that race, I'm pretty sure who would win it.

Alonso has dropped a little in race craft (think Aus 16 misjudgment) in the last 18 months but is still the driver I would hire if I was starting a new team.

I can see how you may think that, but I think it's just desperation/not caring. I don't think we'd see any mistakes if he had the focus of sitting in a potentially race-winning car each weekend, or knowing a WDC was at stake.

I always thought it was an age factor. After all even Michael dropped off towards the end at Ferrari and especially at Mercedes. However the more I think about it, the more I think your point is valid. His performance at Indy where race craft is imperative was great and that car was competitive until the engine went on it.

It depends on a few different things. Which would be the better car, the RB or the Ferrari? In 2014 both of them was quite similar if my memory serves me, with Ferrari possibly having the better engine. Vettel has always wanted to drive for Ferrari and he would probably take that chance even if he would have beaten Ricciardo.

If the RB had been superior to the Ferrari and if Vettel had dominated Ricciardo, with RB having a chance to beat Mercedes then I think he might have stayed.

_________________Winner of the [Charging Hamilton Trophy] !Winner of the [Dominant Hamilton Trophy] !

It depends on a few different things. Which would be the better car, the RB or the Ferrari? In 2014 both of them was quite similar if my memory serves me, with Ferrari possibly having the better engine. Vettel has always wanted to drive for Ferrari and he would probably take that chance even if he would have beaten Ricciardo.

If the RB had been superior to the Ferrari and if Vettel had dominated Ricciardo, with RB having a chance to beat Mercedes then I think he might have stayed.

The Ferrari was the worst engine, they had problems with the ERS deployment dumping it's power, both ICE's were underpowered but the Renault ERS was much better. RB had the better chassis.

I don't think he'd have activated his get out clause if he had beaten Dan so if he beats him he stays for at least 2015.

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

It depends on a few different things. Which would be the better car, the RB or the Ferrari? In 2014 both of them was quite similar if my memory serves me, with Ferrari possibly having the better engine. Vettel has always wanted to drive for Ferrari and he would probably take that chance even if he would have beaten Ricciardo.

If the RB had been superior to the Ferrari and if Vettel had dominated Ricciardo, with RB having a chance to beat Mercedes then I think he might have stayed.

I've had that one, but only in a computer game for my Master System 2.

Those were the days.

I'm surprised you actually bought a Master System 2. Didn't learn your lesson from the MS1?

I never had the "pleasure" of the MS1 bud, went straight to the 2nd one. And to be fair it was my folks doing the buying, I was only a pup at the time

Went from a Spectrum ZX to the MS2 so I was happy enough not having to wait ages while the game loaded!. Having a game pre-loaded into the system that fired up straight away just about blew my tiny mind.

I assumed we'd peaked right there tbh.

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

It depends on a few different things. Which would be the better car, the RB or the Ferrari? In 2014 both of them was quite similar if my memory serves me, with Ferrari possibly having the better engine. Vettel has always wanted to drive for Ferrari and he would probably take that chance even if he would have beaten Ricciardo.

If the RB had been superior to the Ferrari and if Vettel had dominated Ricciardo, with RB having a chance to beat Mercedes then I think he might have stayed.

People have short memories.

The 2014 Ferrari was a heap of sh*t.

That's an understatement. I recall a stat that stated two Raikkonen's at Ferrari would have seen them finish about 7-8th in the constructors.

I've had that one, but only in a computer game for my Master System 2.

Those were the days.

I'm surprised you actually bought a Master System 2. Didn't learn your lesson from the MS1?

I never had the "pleasure" of the MS1 bud, went straight to the 2nd one. And to be fair it was my folks doing the buying, I was only a pup at the time

Went from a Spectrum ZX to the MS2 so I was happy enough not having to wait ages while the game loaded!. Having a game pre-loaded into the system that fired up straight away just about blew my tiny mind.

I assumed we'd peaked right there tbh.

Did you not have that pinnacle of technology on your Spectrum = to whit, the mighty Micro Drive For some reason, this and the add on ram pack seemed to coincide with me discovering BluTac About a packet a month I think

I've had that one, but only in a computer game for my Master System 2.

Those were the days.

I'm surprised you actually bought a Master System 2. Didn't learn your lesson from the MS1?

I never had the "pleasure" of the MS1 bud, went straight to the 2nd one. And to be fair it was my folks doing the buying, I was only a pup at the time

Went from a Spectrum ZX to the MS2 so I was happy enough not having to wait ages while the game loaded!. Having a game pre-loaded into the system that fired up straight away just about blew my tiny mind.

It depends on a few different things. Which would be the better car, the RB or the Ferrari? In 2014 both of them was quite similar if my memory serves me, with Ferrari possibly having the better engine.

People have short memories.

The 2014 Ferrari was a heap of sh*t.

They were not equivalent. Alonso - having one of his best seasons ever - finished just behind Seb, who was having a really bad season. That doesn't mean the cars were equal.

I've had that one, but only in a computer game for my Master System 2.

Those were the days.

I'm surprised you actually bought a Master System 2. Didn't learn your lesson from the MS1?

I never had the "pleasure" of the MS1 bud, went straight to the 2nd one. And to be fair it was my folks doing the buying, I was only a pup at the time

Went from a Spectrum ZX to the MS2 so I was happy enough not having to wait ages while the game loaded!. Having a game pre-loaded into the system that fired up straight away just about blew my tiny mind.

I assumed we'd peaked right there tbh.

Did you not have that pinnacle of technology on your Spectrum = to whit, the mighty Micro Drive For some reason, this and the add on ram pack seemed to coincide with me discovering BluTac About a packet a month I think

Afraid not, only thing I remember we had was a gun so you could play Bullseye.

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

I've had that one, but only in a computer game for my Master System 2.

Those were the days.

I'm surprised you actually bought a Master System 2. Didn't learn your lesson from the MS1?

I never had the "pleasure" of the MS1 bud, went straight to the 2nd one. And to be fair it was my folks doing the buying, I was only a pup at the time

Went from a Spectrum ZX to the MS2 so I was happy enough not having to wait ages while the game loaded!. Having a game pre-loaded into the system that fired up straight away just about blew my tiny mind.

I assumed we'd peaked right there tbh.

Alex the Kid?

That's the fella yeah, lol.

I bloody loved that game, drove me nuts but it was the business when I was a pup.

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

I've had that one, but only in a computer game for my Master System 2.

Those were the days.

I'm surprised you actually bought a Master System 2. Didn't learn your lesson from the MS1?

I never had the "pleasure" of the MS1 bud, went straight to the 2nd one. And to be fair it was my folks doing the buying, I was only a pup at the time

Went from a Spectrum ZX to the MS2 so I was happy enough not having to wait ages while the game loaded!. Having a game pre-loaded into the system that fired up straight away just about blew my tiny mind.

I assumed we'd peaked right there tbh.

Did you not have that pinnacle of technology on your Spectrum = to whit, the mighty Micro Drive For some reason, this and the add on ram pack seemed to coincide with me discovering BluTac About a packet a month I think

Afraid not, only thing I remember we had was a gun so you could play Bullseye.

If you moved anything the system crashed, so it all had to be stuck down and stuck to eachother to hold it still. there was blutac to the tray it was on, the expansion pack was blutac'ed to the port, the memory pack blutacked to that, and the microdrive slot blutacked to that, and the programable joystick blutacked in the side. It looked like a coral reef

Then you have Monaco 2014 and the block and Hungary 2016 when Nico was slower than Ricciardo and Hamilton but didn't lift much for the yellows when everybody else aborted. Risky and smart in equal measure - but he was nowhere near the quickest driver that day. That is 7 of Nico's poles kind of unopposed. I don't think Hamilton took a single lucky pole against Nico.

29-35 flatters him a bit, no doubt Hamilton would have had a few more and Nico a few less if Hamilton didn't break down so much in qualifying.

Hungary 2013 was lucky. Nico was fastest in Q1, fastest in Q2, but his brake bias adjuster broke in Q3.Belgium 2013 was also lucky, Nico was much faster than Lewis in the rain. Lewis just got an extra lap in because Mercedes sent out Nico at the wrong time.

Overall when neither drivers were disadvantaged, Nico took pole roughly 40% of the time. That's still not very convincing from Lewis.